If 9/11 was an "inside job" was the 1993 bombing of the WTC one, as well? - GoFuckYourself.com

Quentin · 03-20-2012, 04:53 PM

The bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 something I don't see discussed much when people talk about 9/11 conspiracies, and I thought it would be interesting to hear what GFY's resident Truthers have to say on the subject.

So, what say you, conspiracy cognescenti; was the 1993 bombing a "false flag" operation, and/or an "inside job?" If so, what was the operation designed to do?

Was the 1993 bombing merely a not-as-successful-as-planned terrorist attack, as its alleged mastermind "Ramzi Yousef" (one of his many aliases) claimed, or is he just a patsy who craves attention... one who also doesn't mind spending the rest of his life in a supermax prison for a crime he did not commit?

I'm sick of reading about 9/11; let's hear some theories about 2/26!

porno jew · 03-20-2012, 04:55 PM

yes false flag to terrorize the people and make them clamor for a police state.

ninavain · 03-20-2012, 04:55 PM

beta test

Coup · 03-20-2012, 04:56 PM

I, for one, welcome our reptilian overlords

Jakez · 03-20-2012, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninavain

beta test

Bryan G · 03-20-2012, 05:33 PM

And here we go again!!

Phillipmcd1 · 03-20-2012, 05:41 PM

Feb 26th WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!! Feb 26 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!

Where's my Alex Jones megaphone

Supz · 03-20-2012, 05:56 PM

No, but the bankjob inside the wtc was an inside job.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Ba...merica_robbery

raymor · 03-20-2012, 06:08 PM

Same old pattern if you think the US government did it.

1993 would therefore be a democrat administration trying it and failing as always.
2001 would be republicans succeeding.

Or it could be, oh I don't know, fucking terroists perhaps? Osama bin laden maybe?

This post is a reading comprehension test. I am not being serious. If you take this post seriously, please read it again.

ilnjscb · 03-20-2012, 06:34 PM

There are, on both sides of this conjecture, scientists and engineers, as well as capable historians, reporters, and analysts. There are pieces of the proof that appear definitive on either side. The "9/11 went as it is commonly believed to have gone" folks have displayed an interest in the truth, and have seemed to rely at least some on common sense. The "9/11 was masterminded by someone other than is commonly believed" folks seem to be creating their ideas from a more emotional place. That doesn't mean they're not correct. Neither side has been able to definitively abrogate the other's case.

Phoenix · 03-20-2012, 06:38 PM

i dont believe so...thus the total failure.
they installed bomb sniffing dogs in there after that. They had to bring in a Bush to get the dogs out 6 months before 9/11

that is just purely coincidence though

porno jew · 03-20-2012, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix

i dont believe so...thus the total failure.

yup. the government is a total failure at everything except when it comes to false flag operations where they now have superhuman powers.

porno jew · 03-20-2012, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

They tried in 93, got caught red handed...they did the gulf of tonkin then admitted it...Iran contra, 9/11, fast and furious, the list goes on and on

19 hijackers who couldnt fly cessnas pulled off moves that top fighterpilots couldnt and took down 3 buildings with 2 planes while making Norad stand down...all while hung over

why are you do dumb?

PornoStar69 · 03-20-2012, 07:10 PM

bots talking to bots

xholly · 03-20-2012, 09:17 PM

Was the USS Cole bombing staged as well?

Australia had the Bali bombing and the UK had theirs, but you don't see us carrying on with all this conspiracy stuff. What is it with America and conspiracies? Im genuinely curious.

porno jew · 03-20-2012, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xholly

Was the USS Cole bombing staged as well?

Australia had the Bali bombing and the UK had theirs, but you don't see us carrying on with all this conspiracy stuff. What is it with America and conspiracies? Im genuinely curious.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/conspir...oid_style.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Par...rican_Politics

classic essay still relevant as most of those themes still exist just in newer forms.

DaddyHalbucks · 03-20-2012, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xholly

Was the USS Cole bombing staged as well?

Australia had the Bali bombing and the UK had theirs, but you don't see us carrying on with all this conspiracy stuff. What is it with America and conspiracies? Im genuinely curious.

All countries have their losers, and America is no exception. Maybe the US government subsidizes ours with greater generosity, so that is why they have the time to dream up such tomfoolery.

DaddyHalbucks · 03-20-2012, 09:32 PM

If 9/11 were a conspiracy, imagine the size of it! It would have involved thousands of people. How come there is no evidence of that?

The US government can't even keep its diplomatic cables secret, how could they have pulled this off?

papill0n · 03-20-2012, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PornoStar69

bots talking to bots

xholly · 03-20-2012, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/conspir...oid_style.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Par...rican_Politics

classic essay still relevant as most of those themes still exist just in newer forms.

I read it. Very interesting stuff PJ thanks for posting that.

xxxdesign-net · 03-20-2012, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/conspir...oid_style.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Par...rican_Politics

classic essay still relevant as most of those themes still exist just in newer forms.

Do you read that while sucking your thumb?

xholly · 03-20-2012, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxdesign-net

Do you read that while sucking your thumb?

Nah I read it while sipping my coffee.

xxxdesign-net · 03-20-2012, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xholly

Nah I read it while sipping my coffee.

It's not because Porno Jew says it's a classic essay than it is lol... reads like an editorial piece you may find in newsweek, washpo or NewYork Time... Thin as paper, no substance, dishonest... this is aimed at people like porno jew who like to be spoon fed reassuring bullshit without ever questioning what they are told..

porno jew · 03-20-2012, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxdesign-net

It's not because Porno Jew says it's a classic essay than it is lol... reads like an editorial piece you may find in newsweek, washpo or NewYork Time... Thin as paper, no substance, dishonest... this is aimed at people like porno jew who like to be spoon fed reassuring bullshit without ever questioning what they are told..

i've questioned more than you ever learnt moron. go play with the half-educated inbred fucks at the prison planet forum and leave the thinking to the grown ups.

xholly · 03-20-2012, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xxxdesign-net

It's not because Porno Jew says it's a classic essay than it is lol... reads like an editorial piece you may find in newsweek, washpo or NewYork Time... Thin as paper, no substance, dishonest... this is aimed at people like porno jew who like to be spoon fed reassuring bullshit...

I don't believe everything I read. However it is an interesting perspective for me to take into account and I do see many themes in that essay in this forum very often.

Its a complicated world of grey where people argue in black and white.

xxxdesign-net · 03-20-2012, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

i've questioned more than you ever learnt moron. go play with the half-educated inbred fucks at the prison planet forum and leave the thinking to the grown ups.

haha... the gown ups? Sounds like that something you've heard many time at your home eh?... I'm very sorry for that... Anyway, you are a lost cause, probably a troll, and I'll let you enjoy yourself in that fantasy world of yours... where you have I'm sure a 180 IQ and questioning all sorts of things...

papill0n · 03-20-2012, 10:26 PM

whats your problem with the links he posted ?

you dont think most, if not all , western countries have paranoid style of governments ?

xxxdesign-net · 03-20-2012, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by papill0n

whats your problem with the links he posted ?

you dont think most, if not all , western countries have paranoid style of governments ?

The writer pretty much claims that in politics, there's no conspiracy, in other words, no powerful men conspiring with each others to acquire even more power... Something that has been going on since the beginning of time... And those who see anything resembling that are either overly partisan or of course paranoid..

This is not to be confused with the US government for exemple, neocons or neolibs selling you their agenda thru fear.... (ex.: Iran will get us!!)

That quote was pretty funny I thought...
"..has been dominated by men who were shrewdly and consistently selling out American national interests."

lol those paranoids!!

JC01 · 03-20-2012, 11:46 PM

It amazes me seemingly intelligent people believe this absolute bullshit about 9/11. In the end, I suppose, people will believe whatever they want to believe

Phoenix · 03-21-2012, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by porno jew

yup. the government is a total failure at everything except when it comes to false flag operations where they now have superhuman powers.

le sigh

i for one hope you are totally right man

NewNick · 03-21-2012, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

They tried in 93, got caught red handed...they did the gulf of tonkin then admitted it...Iran contra, 9/11, fast and furious, the list goes on and on

19 hijackers who couldnt fly cessnas pulled off moves that top fighterpilots couldnt and took down 3 buildings with 2 planes while making Norad stand down...all while hung over

Yes - but you also think that Hitler did not do it and Santorum is as big a mass murderer as Stalin. (I would love to see what his lawyers say about that one !)

You also think that you are the one with the inside track on all this and that anyone who believes the official versionof anything is a brain washed idiot. (oh but Hiroshima did actually happen the way the history books say right ?)

shimmy2 · 03-21-2012, 03:01 AM

gov is getting sloppier with their cover stories i'll say that

SmokeyTheBear · 03-21-2012, 07:07 AM

pretty sure remembering the 93 bombing was planned under fbi watch so not a very good example lol

NewNick · 03-21-2012, 07:21 AM

The moon landings, the grassy knoll, the Holocaust, relentless Alien abduction, 911, Elvis alive and well and living in Droitwich, Michael Jackson simply misunderstood, the list goes on and on and on...........

Only in America !

MediaGuy · 03-21-2012, 07:27 AM

Make of it what you will:
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/28/ny...ted=all&src=pm

It may have been a bad call they don't want to own up to, but has it become a policy or strategy?:

http://politics.salon.com/2011/09/29/fbi_terror/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...e-terror-plots

:D

u-Bob · 03-21-2012, 08:20 AM

about 9/11:
Was there a conspiracy? Of course. Unless you think that one and the same individual hijacked all 4 planes, there was by definition a conspiracy.

Was there a cover up? Most probably yes. It's said that every success has many fathers, but every failure's an orphan. In every organization, when something goes right, when a project is successful or profitable, there will be many people ready to take the credit. When something goes wrong, most people will distance themselves. When something goes wrong most people will deny they were responsible. When something goes terribly wrong most people will even try to hide the fact that they were involved or might have had the opportunity to prevent the bad things from happening. This is especially true of large bureaucratic structures.

Regarding conspiracies, asking questions and integrity:
Butler Shaffer's spot on:

Quote:

I have lost my sense of humor to indulge those who reflexively deny the role of conspiracies in human affairs. In the months following 9/11 ? and most strenuously in the days leading up to the fifth anniversary of this event ? conventional thinking has dictated that commentaries on that atrocity carry the disclaimer ?I am not suggesting a conspiracy.? It seems to be understood that entrance to the temples of respectable journalism, academic scholarship, or polite society would be denied anyone who transgressed this canon.

It is not that a speaker must refrain from expressing any particular conspiracy theory to explain troublesome occurrences: one must avoid the implication that any form of human behavior might be directed or influenced by conspiratorial forces. To even consider the possibility that a given event might have been produced by a conspiracy, is to run the risk of being labeled a ?paranoid? or a ?wacko.? As we have no desire to appear foolish in the eyes of others, we give in to such intimidation and preface our opinions with the aforesaid mantra.

How easily most of us sell out our intellectual integrity, and at distress-sale prices. Even men and women with excellent minds who should know better have collapsed in the face of such a charge. Do we have such a fear of our own minds that we can no longer stand up to the epistemological inquiry that is at the base of our character and intelligence: how do we know what we know? Upon what basis do we form our opinions about the world: the consensus of our neighbors, or our independent judgments?

Any intellectually respectable opinion must be well-grounded in empirical fact and rational analysis. I have no use for those who spin conspiratorial theories out of little more than fantasy, wishful thinking, or the failure to distinguish a temporal relationship from a causal one. The assumption that because event ?X? occurred, and was followed by event ?Y,? a causal connection has been established, is among the shabbiest forms of reasoning. One might just as well argue for the proposition that wet sidewalks cause rain. In fact, I have no use for conspiracy theories at all, preferring ? as my late friend, Chris Tame, so well stated it ? to focus attention on the facts of conspiracies! As annoying as those are who offer lazy, simple-minded explanations for complex events, I am far more aggravated by those otherwise intelligent souls who help to man the barricades of ignorance against honest and empirically-based inquiries into topics they have been told are beyond rightful questioning.

As the events of 9/11 continue ? like a monster movie ? to provide us with fear-ridden entertainment, let me use them to illustrate my point. There have been numerous DVDs, articles, books, and other works that challenge the government's ?official? explanations for these attacks. While some of these presentations test one's credulity, others have provided purported evidence which, if true, would lead intelligent minds to demand further investigation. To say this, however, is not to give credence to any particular theory that one might offer as a counter-explanation to the ?official? one. It is only to suggest that a further examination might be merited.

To ask empirically based questions is not to make an accusation, but only to pursue the ?cui bono?? question as a point of departure for uncovering wrongdoing. When a government official was murdered in ancient Rome, it was customary to begin the investigation with that question: ?who benefited?? My wife and I are fans of the Inspector Morse television mysteries produced by the BBC. In a recent rerun, a man was murdered, and the first question out of Morse's mouth was ?who stood to benefit from this man's death??

The answer to the ?cui bono? question does not necessarily identify the culprit, but it is a very rational place from which to begin asking questions. To be a suspect is not to be accused. If a woman is found murdered, her husband will probably be the first one interviewed by the police in an effort to find her killer. If the victim had a one-million dollar insurance policy on her life, with her husband as the beneficiary, this will add to the intensity of the investigation. This does not, of course, prove that the husband was responsible for his wife's death, only that it is sensible for the police to intensify their inquiry as to him.

I spoke to a young college student the other day. He informed me that he had asked his political science professor whether he thought it possible that persons within the United States government might have been involved in the 9/11 attacks. His professor adamantly denied even the possibility, saying that American government officials were too decent to ever do such a thing. Is this what passes for ?science? in the study of government?

If this academician is prepared to be disabused of his delusions of faith in political systems, he might want to go to ?Google,? and enter the phrase ?Operation Northwoods.? Numerous entries will appear, with the first one ? from Wikipedia ? providing, perhaps, the greatest amount of information on this 1962 scheme by leading Defense Department officials. The plan was to have terrorist acts committed in various American cities ? including Washington, D.C. ? in which people would be shot; bombings would take place and planes hijacked; while ?evidence? would be fabricated implicating the Castro regime with such acts. One proposal in the plan called for the destruction of an empty drone plane ? which, people would be told, carried American college students on a holiday. All of these contrived ?attacks? would then be used as a justification for an attack on Cuba. This plan had the written support of all members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, including its chairman.

That top U.S. government officials could concoct such a deadly plan as a pretext for war in no way proves that 9/11 was a similarly contrived event. What it does do, however, is strip away some of the high-school civics class veneer of the state that leads most Americans, including the aforesaid political science professor, to dismiss in knee-jerk fashion and without any felt need to examine the evidence, the idea that their government could engage in such calculated wrongdoing. In light of the lies, forgeries, cover-ups, and other deceptions leading to a ?war? in Iraq, how can any intellectually honest person categorically deny the possibility of the involvement of American political interests in 9/11?

u-Bob · 03-21-2012, 08:21 AM

pt 2:

Quote:

I want to emphasize, again, that I am not even suggesting that persons other than Al Qaeda operatives were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. I know of no evidence sufficient to sustain such an accusation. I am, however, suggesting that a number of critics of the ?official? explanation have offered enough thoughtful evidence and factual analysis to warrant a thorough investigation of these events. The inquiry should be conducted by competent men and women with no preconceived agenda ? whether as defenders or critics of governmental behavior ? and without fear of asking any and all empirically related questions. Were he not a fictional character, I would insist that Inspector Morse ? with his ?cui bono?? disposition ? be made chairman of the investigatory group.

For such an inquiry to have meaning, it must be accompanied by a widespread change in current attitudes that make most Americans unwilling to consider the possibility of ?conspiracies? directing events. Such a naïve mindset reflects an ignorance of so much of human history as to be embarrassing. The role of the ?agent provocateur? ? which found expression in the Operation Northwoods plan ? is much better known to Europeans, whose political histories are replete with well-established in-house scheming.

To help my American neighbors get beyond this anti-conspiratorial brain-lock, I proclaim that the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were, indeed, brought about by a conspiracy. Any who deny this are invited to explain why the World Trade Center buildings no longer appear on the New York City skyline! Unless one is to offer the state's favorite ?one-lone-nut-with-two-commandeered-airplanes? as the causal explanation, it seems quite evident that these attacks were brought about by at least two persons, thus constituting a ?conspiracy.? The next question is whether the conspirators were of Al Qaeda or other as-yet undisclosed origins or, perhaps, a combination thereof. One could contend that these occurrences were the products of nothing more than random accidents; a bad day for airline pilots who could not keep from plowing their planes into buildings. But even such a far-fetched explanation implicates a conspiracy, as many persons in both the government and the media went to great lengths to inform us that these were planned attacks.

What forces were responsible for the crimes of 9/11? Admittedly, I do not know, nor am I prepared to transform my skepticisms into accusations. Perhaps it is the lawyer in me that has this strange attraction to evidence as the basis for my empirical judgments. In employing the ?cui bono?? test as a point of departure, I find only two groups which, in Inspector Morse's question, seem to have benefited from these attacks: (1) Al Qaeda, and (2) the United States government. Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden have become a major political force in the world, in large part due to the Bush administration's violent reaction to 9/11. But the American government ? with its expanded police and military powers, increased military spending and the creation of new weapons, and the popular acceptance of the idea that people can be held, indefinitely, without trial ? has benefited from this event by greatly expanding its powers. 9/11 was the product of a conspiracy, the only question being: who were the conspirators?

But as with a murder investigation, that one has benefited from a crime does not prove one's causal role in it. It is important that this critical distinction continue to be made. Suspicion and guilt are not synonymous words. At the same time, however, intellectually respectable thinking demands a willingness to pursue any inquiry wherever it may lead. There is far too much at stake in our world for any of us to take comfort in our institutionally-certified ignorance by pulling the blankets up over our heads so that we not see the bogeyman.

But there is another factor ? what I call ?existential courage? ? that must remain at the forefront of our efforts to live as human beings, rather than as servo-mechanisms to the institutional order. What kind of people are we that we should lay our liberties, property, and lives ? including the lives of our children ? at the feet of rulers, to be disposed of in any manner that suits their momentary temperaments? What have we become that we regard any questioning of this arrangement as the products of ?irresponsible? or ?paranoid? minds? Why should free and energized minds be fearful of asking any questions, particularly those we have been told it is improper to ask?

pimpmaster9000 · 03-21-2012, 09:28 AM

what conspiracy? LOL don't flatter yourselves...

they already tax the shit out of you, rape your countries economy like a congo whore, enslave your people with national debt, bomb the shit out of defenseless 3rd world resource rich countries and even when it all fails its "too big to fail" and you get to pick up the tab...

you really think they need to pretend anything? you really think they are afraid of your reaction?

what conspiracy? LOL you guys are too much in debt and too scared to rock the boat LOL...you have had the same outfit in power for the last 50 years...

porno jew · 03-21-2012, 09:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

LOL worst articles ever. Total authority worshipers. How is the government NOT the biggest conspiracy theorists of all time?

Government: "Iraq is making weapons of mass destruction to kill all their people!"
Person: "Ugh no they're not"
Government: "Shut up conspiracy theorist"

Same thing now with Iran

AL Qaeda does not exist. It's just a bunch of muslims running around selling drugs in caves. No different than a bunch of guys like the bloods and crips.

shut up dummy. that article wasn't written by a government "spokes" person.

Rochard · 03-21-2012, 10:34 AM

I've never given this any thought, and I'm guessing very few have. The original bombing of the WTC was a news blip back then, and under reported.

The difference is 9/11 was recorded from dozens of directions, on video, so we can go back and question everything one frame at a time.

barcodes · 03-21-2012, 10:41 AM

Sly · 03-21-2012, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xholly

Was the USS Cole bombing staged as well?

Australia had the Bali bombing and the UK had theirs, but you don't see us carrying on with all this conspiracy stuff. What is it with America and conspiracies? Im genuinely curious.

Forgot the train bombing in Spain? I want to say 2005.

Quentin · 03-21-2012, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

pretty sure remembering the 93 bombing was planned under fbi watch so not a very good example lol

That's one way to interpret what Emad Salem has said, I suppose, although I think it's a bit of a stretch to say that the 1993 was "planned under the FBI's watch," even if you believe what Emad Salem said on the tapes in question.

Here's one of the more detailed articles I've read on the subject; if you read about the exchanges between Salem, John Anticev and Louis Napoli, do they really sound like a conversation between people who conspired with each other to carry off a bombing, or do they sound more like an informant disagreeing with his handlers about what details he told them, and when he relayed those details?

Here's an example of what I mean:

Quote:

Throughout, the transcripts reveal the mood of guilt and recrimination in the wake of the devastating trade center blast. In one early conversation secretly taped by Mr. Salem while riding in a car with two F.B.I. agents soon after the explosion, the informer and the agents argue whether Mr. Salem had specifically informed them months earlier that the attack on the World Trade Center would take place.

"I told you so, that this is one of the targets," Mr. Salem says. "You forgot. You have your papers. Go back to it. World Trade Center, Empire State Building, Grand Central. Times Square."

"I looked over my notes," one of the agents, John Anticev, says. "I didn't see anything about a target."

To this, Detective Napoli, says: "I was there also. I don't remember you saying target."

So, if the FBI was organizing the attack, and using Salem to build the bomb, why would they even be talking about whether he told them one of the potential targets was the World Trade Center? Presumably, the people running the plot would already know what the target was, no?

Salem's claims are interesting, but to me, they don't even begin to suggest that the FBI built the bomb used in the WTC attack. Even the portion that is quoted on Emad Salem's wikipedia page, which some people appear to believe represents a 'smoking gun' of some kind indicating the FBI was running the bomb plot, sounds to me like a dispute over how, when and how much Salem is to be paid for his work as an informant, with Salem offering a hypothetical situation as an example of how all this could blow up in the FBI's face, as part of his effort to get paid in the way he wants to be paid. (Listen to the actual MP3s, rather than just reading the excerpt quoted on the wikipedia page.)

The book The Cell goes into a lot of depth about investigations into the 1993 bombings, the assassination of Meir Kahane and a number of other pre-9/11 plots. It includes a lot more information about the history of Emad Salem's relationship with the FBI, as well.

I'm sure that book is considered pure propaganda by a lot of people (particularly since one of the authors later became a spokesperson for the FBI), but I thought it was a good read, and its narrative seemed pretty credible to me. Some of what it reported has since been shown to be inaccurate and/or incomplete, but not in a way that suggests the authors were being intentionally misleading -- just that new facts have surfaced that they weren't aware of when they wrote the book. It certainly doesn't paint either the FBI or CIA in a very positive light, but it pegs incompetence and risk aversion as the primary causes of their lack efficacy, rather than a nefarious conspiracy to kill their fellow Americans.

I'm not entirely closed to the idea that there was more to these attacks than what we've been told, I just think that what has been omitted from the story is more likely to be additional evidence of insanely poor judgment and/or outright incompetence at FBI and CIA than it is to be some cloak and dagger conspiracy involving remote control planes, cruise missiles, the Mossad, voice simulators, holographic planes, grey aliens, and/or the Nabisco Corp.

u-Bob · 03-21-2012, 11:01 AM

50

Quentin · 03-21-2012, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

How many times has the FBI been caught creating up these plots and then acting like heroes? Time and time again

When the "plot" in question is like the one in Miami that was described by the FBI as "more aspirational than operational," then I think you have a point... but who got to act like a hero after failing to stop the 1993 attacks? How about after failing to stop 9/11?

If the reason they cook up the attacks is to look like heroes, then allowing the attacks they plan to actually take place is a rather odd way to create an impression of their heroism, isn't it?

I think there's plenty of legitimate criticism to be had of the FBI, CIA and the "war on terror" generally; but I also think that discussions of the wilder, more elaborate conspiracy theories tend to distract from the troublesome questions that really should be asked and answered -- like just how much the CIA really knew about Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the two hijackers they had under surveillance in Kaula Lumpur, and who they knew were in the U.S. prior to the 9/11 attacks.

MediaGuy · 03-21-2012, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

When the "plot" in question is like the one in Miami that was described by the FBI as "more aspirational than operational," then I think you have a point... but who got to act like a hero after failing to stop the 1993 attacks? How about after failing to stop 9/11?

If the reason they cook up the attacks is to look like heroes, then allowing the attacks they plan to actually take place is a rather odd way to create an impression of their heroism, isn't it?

This is where the whole question of motive arises, and the question of *whose motive*?

With all the secretariate and directorate swaps happening (Patraeus is now CIA head, Panetta is Defense, Gates held both across two administrations) and the influence of the neo-cons across all security and intelligence arms of government, it makes you wonder on whose behalf the FBI is/was acting.

The FBI isn't entrapping people to make themselves look the hero, though that would be a residual effect; however all these "small" operations keep reminding people in the form of big headlines of the "War on Terror" and the need to ramp up security and maintain suspension of Habeas Corpus and Posse Comitatus. The smaller headlines about suspects being released for lack of evidence, or found not guilty, or simply the "involvement" of FBI informants as both enablers and recruiters, are always back-page peeps and hold no sway over the initial impact of the Big News.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

I think there's plenty of legitimate criticism to be had of the FBI, CIA and the "war on terror" generally; but I also think that discussions of the wilder, more elaborate conspiracy theories tend to distract from the troublesome questions that really should be asked and answered -- like just how much the CIA really knew about Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, the two hijackers they had under surveillance in Kaula Lumpur, and who they knew were in the U.S. prior to the 9/11 attacks.

Clarke recently griped about this; and the whole FBI/CIA separation of jurisdictions seems to have been blurred. It's as if the Reagan Doctrine has been re-awakened and "foreign" means nothing anymore. Along with the NDAA, anyone inside the borders of the US can be surveilled, tracked, enabled, recruited and set loose within the US (and shrouded behind the veil of "National Security") with the same license the CIA had outside national borders during the cold war.

While the CIA may claim occultus privilegium about al-Hazmi and al-Mihdar, it was the FBI whose knowledge of those two was first revealed as they had been close to an FBI informant who was their landlord and confidante. Clarke complained that there was no way the CIA couldn't have known, and why he wasn't informed by them for some reason, rather than the FBI revelation years later.

During the joint inquiry post-9/11, the two Bobs (Graham and Kerry) were also made aware of much "sensitive" information of the sort, particularly regarding Saudi Arabia, but they couldn't tell anyone due to state secrecy (and I believe their deputization by the FBI, which made them criminally liable if they talked about anything that was redacted in their final report).

These "chess games" being played in part in the media, or the alternative media, seem bent on making any revelation of this sort appear "fringe" and "crackpot", even when the Richard Clarkes and other "insiders" actually come out; and not to invoke another conspiracy theory but as a "for example" in the same vein as the '93 WTC bombing and precursor to the steps ultimately taken after 9/11, the consequences of the Oklahoma City bombing and the "revelations" or insufficiently disclosed FBI knowledge (National Security again) from the indications that McVeigh wasn't alone and didn't set off the only explosives that day also dredge up the question of what motives would be behind FBI facilitation (fore- and post) of the potential and eventual events that day, and who was served by keeping the "official" story alive in the foreground, even if little spikes of secondary evidence blipped up in the background?

MediaGuy · 03-23-2012, 06:33 AM

So... nobody thinks the .93 bombing was suspicious?

NewNick · 03-23-2012, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MediaGuy

So... nobody thinks the .93 bombing was suspicious?

I think your suspicious.

Grapesoda · 03-23-2012, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin

The bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 something I don't see discussed much when people talk about 9/11 conspiracies, and I thought it would be interesting to hear what GFY's resident Truthers have to say on the subject.

So, what say you, conspiracy cognescenti; was the 1993 bombing a "false flag" operation, and/or an "inside job?" If so, what was the operation designed to do?

Was the 1993 bombing merely a not-as-successful-as-planned terrorist attack, as its alleged mastermind "Ramzi Yousef" (one of his many aliases) claimed, or is he just a patsy who craves attention... one who also doesn't mind spending the rest of his life in a supermax prison for a crime he did not commit?

I'm sick of reading about 9/11; let's hear some theories about 2/26!

yes, the bomb was 'inside'

NewNick · 03-23-2012, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyClips

The plot was created by the FBI and allowed to happen by the FBI

How do you know this Johnnyboi ?

03-20-2012, 04:53 PM	#1
Quentin Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,280	If 9/11 was an "inside job" was the 1993 bombing of the WTC one, as well? The bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 something I don't see discussed much when people talk about 9/11 conspiracies, and I thought it would be interesting to hear what GFY's resident Truthers have to say on the subject. So, what say you, conspiracy cognescenti; was the 1993 bombing a "false flag" operation, and/or an "inside job?" If so, what was the operation designed to do? Was the 1993 bombing merely a not-as-successful-as-planned terrorist attack, as its alleged mastermind "Ramzi Yousef" (one of his many aliases) claimed, or is he just a patsy who craves attention... one who also doesn't mind spending the rest of his life in a supermax prison for a crime he did not commit? I'm sick of reading about 9/11; let's hear some theories about 2/26! __________________ Q. Boyer

03-20-2012, 05:33 PM	#6
Bryan G Confirmed User Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Toronto Posts: 8,338	And here we go again!! __________________ Bryan skype: bryan.glass3 \| ICQ 302999591

03-20-2012, 06:08 PM	#9
raymor Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 3,745	Same old pattern if you think the US government did it. 1993 would therefore be a democrat administration trying it and failing as always. 2001 would be republicans succeeding. Or it could be, oh I don't know, fucking terroists perhaps? Osama bin laden maybe? This post is a reading comprehension test. I am not being serious. If you take this post seriously, please read it again. Last edited by raymor; 03-20-2012 at 06:17 PM..

03-20-2012, 06:38 PM	#11
Phoenix BACON BACON BACON Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poems everybody, the laddie fancies himself a poet Posts: 35,457	i dont believe so...thus the total failure. they installed bomb sniffing dogs in there after that. They had to bring in a Bush to get the dogs out 6 months before 9/11 that is just purely coincidence though __________________ Skype Phoenixskype1 Telegram PhoenixBrad https://quantads.io

03-20-2012, 07:10 PM	#14
PornoStar69 Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: xxweekxx mothers bed. Posts: 2,031	bots talking to bots __________________ GFY King?

03-20-2012, 04:55 PM	#2
porno jew Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 10,166	yes false flag to terrorize the people and make them clamor for a police state.

03-20-2012, 04:55 PM	#3
ninavain So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 6,268	beta test

03-20-2012, 04:56 PM	#4
Coup 🚨 PBBC International 🚨 Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: /👁\ Posts: 9,931	I, for one, welcome our reptilian overlords

03-20-2012, 05:41 PM	#7
Phillipmcd1 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 665	Feb 26th WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!! Feb 26 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!! Where's my Alex Jones megaphone

03-20-2012, 05:56 PM	#8
Supz Arthur Flegenheimer Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 11,056	No, but the bankjob inside the wtc was an inside job. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Ba...merica_robbery

03-20-2012, 06:34 PM	#10
ilnjscb Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 8,824	There are, on both sides of this conjecture, scientists and engineers, as well as capable historians, reporters, and analysts. There are pieces of the proof that appear definitive on either side. The "9/11 went as it is commonly believed to have gone" folks have displayed an interest in the truth, and have seemed to rely at least some on common sense. The "9/11 was masterminded by someone other than is commonly believed" folks seem to be creating their ideas from a more emotional place. That doesn't mean they're not correct. Neither side has been able to definitively abrogate the other's case.

03-20-2012, 09:17 PM	#15
xholly Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 817	Was the USS Cole bombing staged as well? Australia had the Bali bombing and the UK had theirs, but you don't see us carrying on with all this conspiracy stuff. What is it with America and conspiracies? Im genuinely curious.

03-20-2012, 09:32 PM	#18
DaddyHalbucks A freakin' legend! Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Las Vegas, Nevada USA Posts: 18,975	If 9/11 were a conspiracy, imagine the size of it! It would have involved thousands of people. How come there is no evidence of that? The US government can't even keep its diplomatic cables secret, how could they have pulled this off? __________________ Boner Money

03-20-2012, 10:26 PM	#27
papill0n Unregistered Abuser Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 15,547	whats your problem with the links he posted ? you dont think most, if not all , western countries have paranoid style of governments ?

03-20-2012, 11:46 PM	#29
JC01 Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 47	It amazes me seemingly intelligent people believe this absolute bullshit about 9/11. In the end, I suppose, people will believe whatever they want to believe __________________

03-21-2012, 03:01 AM	#32
shimmy2 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Dominican Republic Posts: 3,245	gov is getting sloppier with their cover stories i'll say that __________________ Make $$$ with Toticos.com! \| Email: 1bluemiata@gmail \| Joutube: ShimmyCash \| Faceberg: ShimmyCash

03-21-2012, 07:07 AM	#33
SmokeyTheBear ►SouthOfHeaven Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: PlanetEarth MyBoardRank: GerbilMaster My-Penis-Size: extralarge MyWeapon: Computer Posts: 28,609	pretty sure remembering the 93 bombing was planned under fbi watch so not a very good example lol __________________ hatisblack at yahoo.com

03-21-2012, 07:21 AM	#34
NewNick Confirmed User Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 7,037	The moon landings, the grassy knoll, the Holocaust, relentless Alien abduction, 911, Elvis alive and well and living in Droitwich, Michael Jackson simply misunderstood, the list goes on and on and on........... Only in America ! __________________ "Americas Hitler" JD Vance. “There isn’t really an upside to Trump.” Tucker Carlson. “a convicted felon rapist is now your president” OneHungLow, gfy.com

03-21-2012, 07:27 AM	#35
MediaGuy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Montrealquebecanada Posts: 5,500	Make of it what you will: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/28/ny...ted=all&src=pm It may have been a bad call they don't want to own up to, but has it become a policy or strategy?: http://politics.salon.com/2011/09/29/fbi_terror/ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011...e-terror-plots :D __________________ YOU Are Industry News! Press Releases: pr[at]payoutmag.com Facebook: Payout Magazine! Facebook: MIKEB! ICQ: 248843947 Skype: Mediaguy1

03-21-2012, 09:28 AM	#38
pimpmaster9000 Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 26,732	what conspiracy? LOL don't flatter yourselves... they already tax the shit out of you, rape your countries economy like a congo whore, enslave your people with national debt, bomb the shit out of defenseless 3rd world resource rich countries and even when it all fails its "too big to fail" and you get to pick up the tab... you really think they need to pretend anything? you really think they are afraid of your reaction? what conspiracy? LOL you guys are too much in debt and too scared to rock the boat LOL...you have had the same outfit in power for the last 50 years...

03-21-2012, 10:34 AM	#40
Rochard Jägermeister Test Pilot Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NORCAL Posts: 73,337	I've never given this any thought, and I'm guessing very few have. The original bombing of the WTC was a news blip back then, and under reported. The difference is 9/11 was recorded from dozens of directions, on video, so we can go back and question everything one frame at a time. __________________ “The choice is no longer between right or left. The choice is between normal and crazy.” - Sarah Huckabee Sanders YNOT MAIL \| THE BEST ADULT MAILING SOLUTION

03-21-2012, 10:41 AM	#41
barcodes Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Florida Posts: 2,040	Last edited by barcodes; 03-21-2012 at 10:46 AM..

03-21-2012, 11:01 AM	#44
u-Bob there's no $$$ in porn Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: icq: 195./568.-230 (btw: not getting offline msgs) Posts: 33,063	50

03-23-2012, 06:33 AM	#47
MediaGuy Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Montrealquebecanada Posts: 5,500	So... nobody thinks the .93 bombing was suspicious? __________________ YOU Are Industry News! Press Releases: pr[at]payoutmag.com Facebook: Payout Magazine! Facebook: MIKEB! ICQ: 248843947 Skype: Mediaguy1